Shooting inside Gurgaon school

Please we don't want this one from the US!

I don't know how or what to react. After the Virginia Tech shooting incident I had heaved a sigh of relief that school shooting and stuff don't happen in India. At least not to my knowledge. And now this. I surprise myself, but I guess the immediate reaction I have (and something I have never said or used before) is ..... WTF!

Sunday irony

I have been having increasing instances of difficulty with falling asleep. And after a really bad instance last night, I chance upon this story in today's TOI. "Educated women sleep better than men. Ironic? Or rather balach!

The energy story

I recently attended a talk on the 'Future of India's Energy Security', and came out with a distinct impression that the Indo-US nuclear deal would not revolutionize the energy sector, and could be a high cost to pay for the proliferation regime. Though the speaker Parmit Pal Chaudhuri, Washington, DC correspondent for Hindustan Times did not say so explicitly, the facts and figures he quoted pointed in that direction.

Today India’s economy is growing at nine percent, whereas energy production has increased at only 5% over the last couple of years. To sustain its economic growth, energy production would have to increase five to seven fold over the next 25 years. According to Chaudhuri a transformation of market forces in the energy sector would be crucial for this. He touched upon the four major energy sectors, laying out the shortcomings in each and the areas that demand change. With the poorest track record and the biggest potential, the coal sector seemed to define the critical condition of the energy sector.

This sector is the most important sector contributing to more than half of India’s energy requirements, and the biggest contender for reform. Unless there is significant reform in the coal sector, other energy reforms would be meaningless. The coal sector is highly inefficient, overstaffed, with poor cost effectiveness and is referred to as the coal mafia in the prime coal producing states of Bihar and Jharkhand. Almost 40% of the coal mined is stolen in transit between the mine and the consumer. In spite of having the fourth largest coal reserves in the world, India is one of the net coal importers due to the inefficiency of the coal industry, and lack of new exploration efforts. There is an urgent need for large efforts at explorations and overall reforms in the culture of the coal industries.

Next in line is Oil. India imports 70% of its oil and it is expected to grow to almost 90% in the next 20 years. The biggest irony of the sector is that it is taxed at very stage and finally subsidized for the consumer. The subsidy burden is estimated to be around $10 billion. However, the huge import bills are partially offset by the export of processed petroleum products, particularly to Iran. Overseas equity purchases in oil are poor, as the nationalized oil companies cannot afford them after running losses due to the tax and subsidy policies.

A silver lining to this sorry state of affairs is the gas sector. It has the highest potential to change the energy profile of India. It is estimated to supply almost 20-25% of the energy in the next 20 years. The sector is witnessing the biggest market reforms, with a large number of private companies participating. It also has the least number of mass based interest groups involved that could dampen the reforms. 96% of India’s gas comes from Qatar alone. It is imported through the sea route, which would continue to be the main transport route as ships get bigger and the shipping costs decrease.

The growth in the nuclear sector is subject to increased fuel and capital inflow. The Indo-US nuclear deal would be instrumental in lifting restrictions on the fuel aspect. While the amendments to the Atomic Energy Act would allow private firms to enter the nuclear power industry and reducing the capital problem. However, Chaudhuri does not think that it would be a prominent contributor to the energy requirements in the near future. Through my readings so far I had gathered that the Indo-US nuclear deal, if successful, would considerably help the generation of electricity. Though I was not expecting any dramatic changes or a sudden reduction in dependence on oil, the strategic benefits of the treaty gave it a different appeal. The proliferation concerns seemed to take a backseat. However, listening once again to how the nuclear energy sector would not transform the energy sector brought me back to the reality of the proliferation risks it would pose. But that is a matter for another post.

Coming back to the talk, Chaudhuri emphasized the success of the wind power sector as a promising sign for renewable energy. Wind power is one of the largest renewable energy sectors in India, but has to depend upon subsidies for efficiency. It has shown the greatest potential so far with private players being active in the field. On the other hand the solar energy sector has a lot of potential but cannot be harnessed efficiently unless there is a technological breakthrough to reduce costs. Chaudhuri believes that biofuel as an option would end in a few years, due to its direct association with increasing food prices worldwide.

He was also very critical of the electricity distribution system and said that on an average an Indian company has to pay almost 80% more than what any company in China pays for electricity. Distribution is a politically sensitive issue and reforms are slow to come. Electricity theft is probably the single largest issue and needs to be addressed for any real reforms in the area. He also talked of how big hydroelectricity projects have taken a backseat after the Narmada project fiasco. Though smaller local projects mostly in Uttaranchal, Sikkim and other hilly areas continue to harness the hydroelectric potential. Private firms are entering the sector and have struck deals for projects in Nepal.

On the Carbon emission debate Chaudhuri was of the view that so long as carbon emissions and economic development are a zero sum game, developing countries cannot be expected to agree to reduce carbon emissions. It is also a politically infeasible option for them. In India the use of biomass as fuel is one of the important contributors to emissions. With poverty levels decreasing, the switch to LPG as a primary domestic fuel would decrease the emissions.

Overall the energy story came out looking rather dismal, and in urgent need of path breaking reforms to sustain India’s economic growth.

Mobiles and tumors

I thought this correlation was rubbished years ago. The study says that the "risk of developing a parotid gland tumour is nearly 50% higher for frequent mobile phone users -- more than 22 hours a month." Though such tumors are non-cancerous and only lead to an increase in size of the gland, some could be cancerous.

I am sure most of us spend more than a day a month talking on the cell. And then we just started a few years back. How about the next generations who use the cell right from high school? Those whose livelihood depends upon these cellphones? A 50% higher risk could translate into a real big number. So are my days numbered?

Ahmedinejad vindicated

Now the US intelligence agencies believe that Iran is "not likely to have enough highly enriched uranium to build a bomb until 2010-2015." The program apparently ran into technical problems after making significant headway in 2007 by installing gas centrifuges used to enrich uranium. The same report mentions that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003 due to "international pressure." And yet the US National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley thinks that the reports findings confirm that "the US was right to be worried about Iran's nuclear ambitions."

For all the good that this finding might do, it puts the ball in Ahmedinejad's court. He has been asserting that Iran is not making a bomb, this reports simply vindicates him. There is nothing stopping him from saying "I told you so!" It makes Ahmedinejad look like the 'truthful' one. It can lead one to believe that his anger against the US is well-placed, justified.

I think I just pity Bush? Not only are his ratings abysmal, it is getting increasingly difficult to tell when he is lying and not.

Update: Iran's reaction - "Iranian state TV hailed the report as a "victory". It said Iran was "honest" and had been "vindicated", while it said the report demonstrated flaws in US intelligence."

The 'nuclear plot'

I think this would be a good story to look out for. With so much concern over the possibility of nuclear material being sold to terrorists, it would interesting to see how the media picks up on the alleged attempt at sale of nuclear material. Where did they get it from? Who were their potential buyers? Or probably it is just a hoax and the concluding piece is as small as this one.

Update: The Nuclear Threat Initiative gives a list of trafficking incidents so far.

Does he look evil to you?

On Pakistan

There has been a lot of criticism of Musharraf’s recent imposition of emergency. Or as I prefer a self-coup following in the tracks of men like Napoleon and Alberto Fujimori. Many have raised concerns over the increased activity in Pakistan’s eastern province, the possibility of increased terrorist activity through Pakistan affecting the war on terror, and a fear of instability in a nuclear-weapon state with a poor non-proliferation record. We have had columnists writing about Musharraf’s defiance of the US, and Bush’s inability to control him. They talked of looking at the reality of Pakistan and reviewing the arms aid ascending since 9/11.

C. Raja Mohan also asked India to take the opportunity to help Pakistan and improve relations. Though he makes a sound argument and I agree that it would be a prudent think to do, I do have some doubts. I am skeptical of the maturity of our relations. What happened with Indira Gandhi’s offer then could happen now. We might want to help, but is Pakistan ready to take it? Will they interpret it as help, or unnecessary interference with intentions of destabilizing or capturing Pakistan? In an ideal world our help would result in better relations with Pakistan, but there is nothing ideal when it comes to Indo-Pak relations. As much as I would love things to improve, I doubt if this is the right time and the right man to do it.

On a different note, T. R. Andhyarujina talks of how this coup is to check the courts. I agree with him. So how do we interpret this; a possibility of democracy in Pakistan due to an activist judiciary? Or another coup, only this time by the judiciary?

Well....

Today's TOI carries a headline, "US arms aid review to Pak relief for India." It took me quite some time to figure out what it meant. Not untill I had read the first paragraph of the story did I read it right. It is supposed to convey 'Review of US arms aid to Pak a relief for India.' I understand the constraints of a sub-editor, but it surely does not justify this!

Can someone please wake up Mr Karat?

What era is he living in?

http://www.indianexpress.com/story/235080.html